Magnetic resonance imaging versus histological assessment for estimation of lesion volume after experimental spinal cord injury

2008 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 301-306 ◽  
Author(s):  
David S. Ditor ◽  
Sunil John ◽  
Jason Cakiroglu ◽  
Colin Kittmer ◽  
Paula J. Foster ◽  
...  

Object The purpose of this study was to compare measures of lesion volume obtained by means of 1.5-T MR imaging to those obtained by the Cavalieri method, 6 weeks after experimental spinal cord injury. Methods Nine male Wistar rats were subjected to spinal cord injury by clip compression (50 g) at the T-4 level. Six weeks postinjury, the rats were sacrificed, and spinal cords were analyzed ex vivo for lesion volume by means of 1.5-T MR imaging and subsequently, by the Cavalieri method. In the latter method, cords were cut longitudinally in 25-μm sections and stained with solochrome cyanin for myelin. The area of the lesion was determined for each serial section, and the distance-weighted sum of all area measures was then calculated to estimate the total lesion volume. Results Bland–Altman analysis showed that the 2 methods had an acceptable level of agreement for lesion volume estimation, but the Cavalieri method was prone to an overestimation bias. The MR imaging estimates of lesion volume were greater than the Cavalieri method estimates in 3 spinal cords, but the difference between measures was within 1 standard deviation of perfect agreement in these 3 lesions, and the mean difference between measures was 18.3%. In contrast, in those lesions in which the Cavalieri method yielded larger lesion volumes (5 lesions), the difference between measures was 2 standard deviations away from perfect agreement for 2 animals and the mean difference between measures was 72.4%. Conclusions The results illustrate that the overestimation bias of the Cavalieri method is due, in part, to artifacts produced during processing of the spinal cord tissue.

1991 ◽  
Vol 39 (3) ◽  
pp. 1164-1166
Author(s):  
Haruo Fujii ◽  
Kazunori Yone ◽  
Takasi Sakou ◽  
Hirosi Itou ◽  
Takanori Imakiire ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
pp. 197140092110268
Author(s):  
Seyedeh Niloufar Rafiei Alavi ◽  
Arian Madani Neishaboori ◽  
Mahmoud Yousefifard

Background As there is no consensus over the efficacy of extracorporeal shockwave therapy in the management of spinal cord injury complications, the current meta-analysis aims to investigate preclinical evidence on the matter. Methods The search strategy was developed based on keywords related to ‘spinal cord injury’ and ‘extracorporeal shockwave therapy’. A primary search was conducted in Medline, Embase, Scopus and Web of Science until the end of 2020. Studies which administered extracorporeal shockwave therapy on spinal cord injury animal models and evaluated motor function and/or histological findings were included. The standardised mean difference with a 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated. Results Seven articles were included. Locomotion was significantly improved in the extracorporeal shockwave therapy treated group (standardised mean difference 1.68, 95% CI 1.05–2.31, P=0.032). It seems that the efficacy of extracorporeal shockwave therapy with an energy flux density of 0.1 mJ/mm2 is higher than 0.04 mJ/mm2 ( P=0.044). Shockwave therapy was found to increase axonal sprouting (standardised mean difference 1.31, 95% CI 0.65, 1.96), vascular endothelial growth factor tissue levels (standardised mean difference 1.36, 95% CI 0.54, 2.18) and cell survival (standardised mean difference 2.49, 95% CI 0.93, 4.04). It also significantly prevents axonal degeneration (standardised mean difference 2.25, 95% CI 1.47, 3.02). Conclusion Extracorporeal shockwave therapy significantly improves locomotor recovery in spinal cord injury animal models through neural tissue regeneration. Nonetheless, in spite of the promising results and clinical application of extracorporeal shockwave therapy in various conditions, current evidence implies that designing clinical trials on extracorporeal shockwave therapy in the management of spinal cord injury may not be soon. Hence, further preclinical studies with the effort to reach the safest and the most efficient treatment protocol are needed.


2008 ◽  
Vol 153 (3) ◽  
pp. 568-582 ◽  
Author(s):  
T Genovese ◽  
A Rossi ◽  
E Mazzon ◽  
R Di Paola ◽  
C Muià ◽  
...  

1989 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 6???13 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dennis J. Maiman ◽  
Joel B. Myklebust ◽  
Khang-Cheng Ho ◽  
John Coats

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document